ABSTRACT. Objective: Despite research suggesting that parental involvement can affect alcohol involvement among adolescents, few studies have focused on parent-based alcohol prevention strategies among college undergraduates. We report the results of a randomized trial of a parent-based intervention (PBI) in a sample of college freshmen. Method: Across two cohorts, 724 incoming freshman-parent dyads completed baseline assessments and were randomly assigned to PBI or intervention as usual (an alcohol fact sheet for parents). Student followup assessments were completed at 4 and 8 months. Results: Two-part latent growth curve modeling was used to test hypothesized intervention effects. Outcome variables were drinks per week (past month), heavy episodic drinking (past 2 weeks), and alcohol-related problems (past 3 months). Over the 8-month follow-up period, PBI had a signifi cant effect on drinks per week but not heavy episodic drinking or alcohol-related problems. Specifi cally, compared with students in the intervention-asusual condition, students receiving the PBI were signifi cantly less likely to transition from nondrinker to drinker status and showed less growth in drinking over the freshman year. However, the direct PBI effect on growth was qualifi ed by a PBI × Gender interaction, with probes indicating that the effect applied to women but not men in the PBI condition. Conclusions: This study extends previous research by demonstrating the potential utility for PBIs to decrease the likelihood of transitioning into drinker status and, at least for women, for slowing growth in drinking over the freshman year. (J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs, Supplement No. 16: 67-76, 2009)

Objective-Using a randomized factorial design, we examined the efficacy of a Brief Motivational Intervention (BMI) and Parent-based Intervention (PBI) as universal preventive interventions to reduce alcohol use among incoming college students. (N = 1,014) were assessed prior to matriculation and at 10-months and 22-months post-baseline. Two-part latent growth modeling was used to simultaneously examine initiation and growth in heavy episodic drinking and alcohol-related consequences. Method-ParticipantsResults-This study retained 90.8% (n = 921) of randomized students at the 10 month follow-up and 84.0% (n = 852) at the 22-month follow-up. BMI participants were significantly less likely than non-BMI participants to initiate heavy episodic drinking and to begin experiencing alcohol-related consequences. Effect sizes were minimal at 10-months (Cohen's h ranged from 0.02-0.07) and small at 22-months (h's from 0.15-0.22). A significant BMI X PBI interaction revealed that students receiving both the BMI and PBI were significantly less likely to report the onset of consequences beyond the sum of the individual intervention effects (h = 0.08 at 10-month and 0.21 at 22-month). Hypothesized direct BMI effects for reductions in heavy episodic drinking and consequences were not observed. Significant mediated effects via changes in descriptive norms were present for both growth and initiation of heavy episodic drinking and consequences.

Background Alcohol and marijuana are psychoactive substances commonly used by young adults and are independently associated with numerous acute and long‐term consequences. Many young adults engage in simultaneous alcohol and marijuana (SAM) use to cross‐fade (i.e., to enhance the effects of intoxication), although the extent to which alcohol use and alcohol‐related consequences increase on SAM occasions compared to alcohol‐only occasions is unclear. This study examines daily data among a sample of SAM users comparing SAM days to other days when young adults only used alcohol. Methods A sample of 409 young adults (age 18 to 25; Mage = 21.6, SD = 2.2; 50.9% women) who reported SAM use in the past month completed 2 bursts of 14 days of daily surveys (28 days in total) assessing alcohol use, alcohol‐related consequences, and SAM use. Results Multilevel models based on alcohol‐only and SAM days (n = 3,016 days; 391 individuals) indicated young adults drank more alcohol on SAM days compared to alcohol‐only days (with no marijuana use). Similarly, days with SAM use were associated with more alcohol‐related positive and negative consequences. The daily association between SAM use and positive consequences was statistically significant, after accounting for the amount of alcohol consumed; in contrast, the association between SAM use and negative consequences was diminished and nonsignificant. Conclusions Among young adult SAM users, days with SAM use were associated with more alcohol use and positive consequences compared to days they only drank alcohol. Further examination of the motivational context for engaging in SAM use, as well as potential physiological interactions between alcohol and marijuana use on alcohol’s effects, is warranted. Alcohol interventions might benefit from addressing increased alcohol use and alcohol‐related consequences as risks associated with SAM use.

The majority of young adults who use alcohol and marijuana sometimes use the two substances simultaneously. Understanding why young adults engage in simultaneous alcohol and marijuana (SAM) use may inform interventions and help offset negative consequences. To date, research has not yet examined motives for SAM use. The current study tested a 26-item measure of motives for SAM use in a community sample of young adults to identify the factor structure and to evaluate associations of subscales of SAM motives with alcohol and marijuana motives and substance use. Young adults from the Seattle metropolitan area (N=286; 58% female, 67% White/Caucasian) were asked about their motives for using alcohol, marijuana, and SAM as well as their use of alcohol and marijuana and related consequences in the past month. Exploratory factor analysis with promax rotation identified four factors to characterize motives for SAM use: (1) conformity (8 items, α=0.87, e.g., "to fit in with a group I like," "pressure from others"), (2) positive effects (6 items, α=0.88, e.g., "cross-faded effects are better," "to get a better high") (3) calm/coping (3 items, α=0.77, e.g., "to calm me down," "to cope with anxiety"), and (4) social (5 items, α=0.78, e.g., "because it is customary on special occasions," "as a way to celebrate"). Results revealed that alcohol, marijuana, and SAM motives were moderately correlated. Even after controlling for alcohol or marijuana motives, SAM motives were associated with SAM use and marijuana use/consequences (but not alcohol use/consequences).

High-intensity drinking (i.e., women/men consuming 8+/10+ drinks in a day) is prevalent and associated with negative consequences. Occasions of high-intensity drinking have markedly high risk; however, previous research has not examined the predictors of these high-risk drinking days. The current study was designed to examine to what extent positive and negative alcohol expectancies predict high-intensity drinking and whether high-intensity drinking on a given day was associated with drinking consequences and their evaluations that day. Frequently-drinking college students (N=342) participated in an intensive longitudinal study of drinking behaviors (N=4,645 drinking days). Days with greater positive and negative expectancies were associated with high-intensity drinking. Days with high-intensity drinking were associated with reporting more positive and negative consequences and with evaluating positive consequences more favorably and evaluating negative consequences less favorably, compared to drinking days without high-intensity drinking. Given this, prevention and intervention efforts may consider specifically targeting high-intensity drinking events as a unique phenomenon.